I really love it when you see a project and think to yourself, “wow, why has that not been done before”. Those projects tend to be some of the most inspiring and ground breaking so when I came across this project by Belatchew Arkitekter I couldn’t resist sharing it with you all.

‘Strawscraper’ transforms transforming  Söder Torn tower in Stockholm into a moving object where its external fabric blows in the wind like grass. The ‘hairs’ use piezoelectric technology to convert the motion of the wind into electricity. The idea of making a static object appear to be a living, moving form that has the capacity to generate energy is an inspiring one - especially when it is this aesthetically beautiful. 

An exploded axonometric for a design concept (work in progress).

Continuing on from yesterday’s rant about architectural renders not being accurate representations of the buildings that they are meant to depict, I give you the One World Trade Centre.

Today it’s spire was fitted, making it the tallest building in the western hemisphere. Let’s talk about that spire. In the render it is depicted as a gleaming object that tapers into a crisp point. The reality is a barbed, obtrusive object, fixed to the pinnacle of the building, bearing no relationship whatsoever to it’s overall design.

I know renders are usually used to show a design in it’s best possible light, but at what point does it become a lie similar to the airbrushing used in makeup adverts or the photoshopped bodies on fashion covers?

Student work from LJMU architecture school. 

John Moore’s Architecture Department is located on the ground floor of the LJMU Arts and Design Academy. The studio space itself is divided down the middle and is well lit with natural light with views at the end down into the basement workshop that seems to have an array of machinery and tools.

Overall the studio itself is everything you would want in an architecture studio; a light, flexible space with plenty of room. It was the way it was being used that I had issues with. I visited on a Friday at around 4.30 pm and it was empty but for a handful of (maximum 10) students. I visited at the start of May, right when deadlines at British architecture schools are fast approaching and here is an empty studio! I have no idea what was going on, maybe they were all on a field trip, but it seemed as if this school has a bad studio culture.

A few specifics I noticed were that alot of the walls had large displays of what looked like previous years work up on display. I am all for a bit of inspiration, but to keep them up for what I assume has been a year is being a little too precious and retrospective. I also noticed an absence of lockers for keeping equipment/supplies/later night chocolate in. Anouther key element that appeared to be missing were that there were no computers, perhaps they were in a suite elsewhere, either way you need computers in a studio. The drawings you produce on screen are just as important as those you produce by hand and to separate a studio in such a way will stop ideas from developing organically and concurrently to those realised by hand. 

Obviously I am judging purely on what I saw, so if any of you are from John Moore’s please correct me if I am wrong!  If I am correct then this is a studio that needs some sort of student group to lobby their department to up their game to make the space more workable. 

Last week I visited John Moores Architecture Department to check out their facilities and studio work. The building they are based in, the LJMU Art and Design Academy, was designed by famous architect Rick Mather who recently passed away. Mather left his mark in Britain designing numerous other educational buildings, galleries and museums including Oxford’s Ashmolean Museum, nominated in 2010 for the Stirling prize. 

* http://www.rickmather.com

Median pay within architecture, information from the Architects Journal.

I I have no idea where they are getting the £20,000 for a Year out Student from. I know nobody, LITERALLY NOBODY, on that sort of money. 

Herzog & de Meuron have gained planning permission for its Blavatnik School of Government in historic Oxford’s city centre. Despite numerous complaints from locals the £30 million scheme will go ahead and shoudl reach completiton in mid-2015.

I presume then, that it will be mid-2015 until we can really understand what the school will look like. I thought that renders were meant to help people understand a design in a way that 2d drawings cannot? Instead this render above, and many others similar to it, show a building where I cannot even read whether it is clad in a shiny material or if it is glass! Are those yellow highlight really going to be there, or is that just artistic license? Who knows! I guess we will all just have to wait till 2015 to find out.

* http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/daily-news/herzog-and-de-meuron-wins-planning-for-oxford-government-school/8647815.article?blocktitle=Breaking-news&contentID=7303

Has anyone else noticed the similarities between the design for American Embassy in London and 41 Cooper Square, both designed by Morphosis Architects?

Look at their renders in comparison to the final built product and the two will not be so dissimilar, they really pay attention to the effect light will have within the circulation atriums and how people will interact within them.

* American Embassy - http://morphopedia.com/projects/new-u-s-embassy-in-london

* Cooper Union - http://morphopedia.com/projects/cooper-union